OBJECTIVE: Maternal expulsive efforts are thought to damage the pelvic floor. We aimed to compare pelvic floor function and anatomy between women who delivered vaginally (VB) versus those with caesarean delivery (CD) prior to the second stage of labour. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: University Hospital Midwifery practice. POPULATION: Nulliparas. METHODS: Pregnant nulliparas were recruited during pregnancy and women who underwent CD prior to the 2nd stage of labour at birth were recruited immediately postpartum. Both groups were followed prospectively to 6 months postpartum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: POPQ, perineal ultrasound (U/S) and Paper Towel Test (PTT), an objective measure of stress incontinence; Incontinence Severity Index (ISI), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Wexner Fecal Incontinence Scale (W) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: 336/448 (75%) VB and 138/224 (62%) CD followed up. The VB group was younger (23.9 ± 4.9 versus 26.6 ± 6.1 years, P < 0.001) and less overweight/obese (38 versus 56%, P < 0.001); baseline functional measures were similar (all P > 0.05). At follow-up, urinary incontinence (UI) (55 versus 46% ISI > 0, P = 0.10), fecal incontinence (FI) (8 versus 13% FI on W, P = 0.12), sexual activity rates (88 versus 92%, P = 0.18) and PFIQ-seven scores were similar. Positive PTT tests (17 versus 6%, P = 0.002) and ≥ Stage 2 prolapse (22 versus 15%, P = 0.03) were higher with VB; differences were limited to points Aa and Ba. U/S findings were not different between groups. Stepwise multivariate analyses controlling for age, body mass index, and non-Hispanic White race for prolapse of points Aa and Ba did not alter conclusions (all P < 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: VB resulted in prolapse changes and objective UI but not in increased self-report pelvic floor dysfunction at 6 months postpartum compared with women who delivered by CD prior to the second stage of labour. The second stage of labour had a modest effect on postpartum pelvic floor function.
OBJECTIVE: Maternal expulsive efforts are thought to damage the pelvic floor. We aimed to compare pelvic floor function and anatomy between women who delivered vaginally (VB) versus those with caesarean delivery (CD) prior to the second stage of labour. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: University Hospital Midwifery practice. POPULATION: Nulliparas. METHODS: Pregnant nulliparas were recruited during pregnancy and women who underwent CD prior to the 2nd stage of labour at birth were recruited immediately postpartum. Both groups were followed prospectively to 6 months postpartum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: POPQ, perineal ultrasound (U/S) and Paper Towel Test (PTT), an objective measure of stress incontinence; Incontinence Severity Index (ISI), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Wexner Fecal Incontinence Scale (W) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: 336/448 (75%) VB and 138/224 (62%) CD followed up. The VB group was younger (23.9 ± 4.9 versus 26.6 ± 6.1 years, P < 0.001) and less overweight/obese (38 versus 56%, P < 0.001); baseline functional measures were similar (all P > 0.05). At follow-up, urinary incontinence (UI) (55 versus 46% ISI > 0, P = 0.10), fecal incontinence (FI) (8 versus 13% FI on W, P = 0.12), sexual activity rates (88 versus 92%, P = 0.18) and PFIQ-seven scores were similar. Positive PTT tests (17 versus 6%, P = 0.002) and ≥ Stage 2 prolapse (22 versus 15%, P = 0.03) were higher with VB; differences were limited to points Aa and Ba. U/S findings were not different between groups. Stepwise multivariate analyses controlling for age, body mass index, and non-Hispanic White race for prolapse of points Aa and Ba did not alter conclusions (all P < 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: VB resulted in prolapse changes and objective UI but not in increased self-report pelvic floor dysfunction at 6 months postpartum compared with women who delivered by CD prior to the second stage of labour. The second stage of labour had a modest effect on postpartum pelvic floor function.
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Victoria Garcia; Rebecca G Rogers; Suzy S Kim; Rebecca J Hall; Dorothy N Kammerer-Doak Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Kate V Meriwether; Rebecca J Hall; Lawrence M Leeman; Laura Migliaccio; Clifford Qualls; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-10-25 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Cara Ninivaggio; Rebecca G Rogers; Lawrence Leeman; Laura Migliaccio; Dusty Teaf; Clifford Qualls Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-11-26 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Kate V Meriwether; Rebecca G Rogers; Gena C Dunivan; Jill K Alldredge; Clifford Qualls; Laura Migliaccio; Lawrence Leeman Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Thomas G Gray; Holly Vickers; Swati Jha; Georgina L Jones; Steven R Brown; Stephen C Radley Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-11-23 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Pamela S Fairchild; Lisa Kane Low; Katherine M Kowalk; Giselle E Kolenic; John O DeLancey; Dee E Fenner Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Kate V Meriwether; Mark E Lockhart; Isuzu Meyer; Holly E Richter Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2019 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 2.091